Fighting Crime: Choices and Priorities

The county divides crime into two categories.Here are the statistics for 2006:

Part 1 Crimes (more serious offenses) reported were up 5.4% over the previous year, including:

15 Murders

141 Rapes

1,166 Robberies

133 Aggravated Assaults

3,804 Burglaries

16,860 Cases of Larceny

2,493 Auto Thefts.

Part 2 Crimes reported were up 6.4% over the previous year, including:

5,428 Minor Assaults

245 Cases of Arson

6,864 Cases of Vandalism

Lots of work there to keep the police department busy. So when our not-so-friendly neighborhood xenophobes at Help Save Maryland requested that the police also take training on enforcing federal immigration law, Chief Manger turned them down.

That just sounds like good, solid prioritization of police resources to me. The training would take five weeks per officer, during which time they would be diverted from the murders, rapes, robberies, and other mayhem being committed by the real criminals. The logical result would be an increase in crime.I think Chief Manger is doing the smart thing.I also think we might need a movement to Help Save Maryland from Help Save Maryland.

Is it fair to ask how much of that increase was caused by illegal aliens? Now I do realize that Maryland (particularly Montgomery) is a soft on crime place, but if there is a disproportionate amount of violent crimes caused by illegals, wouldn’t you be concerned? Just curious.

Perfectly reasonable question. Most crime in the county is committed by people who are here legally, according to the police (see the linked article). So if the idea of targeting illegal aliens is an attempt to reduce crime, it is still a misplaced effort.

It’s also worth asking: why would that be a strategy for reducing crime? To attack crime, target criminals directly. So HSM’s request really has nothing to do with crime, but everything to do with bigotry.

I didn’t say “most crime,” I said “disproportionate amount.” If people are here is this country illegally, and have a greater likelihood of committing other crimes more than the general population, how is wanting to remove such people bigotry? In fact, this would be a strategy for reducing crime.

Which brings up the next question: If a group is here illegally, and commits crimes at a rate higher than the general population, then why do your elected officials tolerate and even encourage the settlement of such people in Montgomery County?

Look, I realize that most immigrant are law-abiding people who are not criminals. I even acknowledge that most of the ones here illegally are seeking economic opportunity and not to disrupt law and order. But then again, why do we have laws to control immigration if we are not willing to enforce them? What should we do instead?

As Hugh Akston used to say, check your premises. *If* they have a greater likelihood of committing crimes” — who says they do? And why use that as a proxy? I’d prefer the police spent their time pursuing criminals, not those who belong to a group which is more likely to be criminal. Frankly, I’d also prefer that the police pursue people who are actually a threat to others, who have committed some violence or theft. Walking from Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, to Laredo, Texas doesn’t present a threat or a risk to anyone.

I am so glad that I moved to Pa. The only way Zinzindor will understand is if he/she becomes at Crime Stat.. I became a stat when I lived in Olney.. News flash the Cops cannot protect you and the minorities are the problem.. I now protect myself via a carry permit…